No. 18-5485
William N. Washington v. Eric Arnold, Warden
IFP
Tags: civil-case civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-rights district-court due-process false-arrest habeas-corpus heck-v-humphrey judicial-review malicious-prosecution parole qualified-immunity standing washington-v-diamond
Latest Conference:
2018-10-05
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right has been made by the petitioner, in light of the recent factual finding, by the United States District Court, in which, it ruled that petitioner's civil case, Washington v. Diamond, No. 17-666, is not barred by Heck v.:Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). App. E 1.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right has been made by the petitioner, in light of the recent factual finding by the United States District Court that petitioner's civil case, Washington v. Diamond, No. 17-666, is not barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994)
Docket Entries
2018-10-09
Petition DENIED.
2018-09-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/5/2018.
2018-06-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 7, 2018)
Attorneys
William N. Washington
William N. Washington — Petitioner